runescapeclassicfandomcom-20200214-history
Forum:Moving the RuneScape Classic Wiki
This is a extremely important matter and I need your replies. Most of you already know that in November, Wikia is releasing the Oasis skin, and many editors are enormously dissatisfied with it (Very little space for content, SiteNotice gone, sidebar gone, cluttered interface, takes 10 minutes to find History of a page). Recently, I was able to view the RSCW in the Oasis skin, and I assure you it is absolutely horrendous. The DeviousMUD Wiki, one of our sister wikis which I own, has already moved. So, in this unsightly matter, I propose that we leave Wikia. This is a very delicate matter to all of you, but it seems that each passing day it becomes more mandatory. I have set up a system for our proposed move here . After you go over the page, please leave your comment here. If this discussion comes to no conclusion, I'll set up a Vote Box. 00:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC) UPDATE - Guys, now I think is the best time to move. Another wiki farm which I spoken of before, ShoutWiki , has recently added the Monaco skin to their lists of skins, and have a very friendly staff to help in a move. Now I believe it is now or never. At our current statistic, we seem to have VERY little editors presently editing this wiki, so it would be easier to move now and inform those who are editing our wiki at present. Any comments? -- 06:50, January 16, 2011 (UTC) PS: By the way, go to your Preferences, click Skin, and choose "Wikia's New Look". Then tell me how you think of the new skin here. Discussion Support -''' As nominator 00:15, October 9, 2010 (UTC) 'Comment -' Too tell you the truth I REALLY DON'T like the new wikia look. So I perfer the same look. User Isaacganz Talk 04:16, October 9, 2010 (UTC) :Agree, I just finished making a extravagant theme for our wiki in monaco, but now because of the new skin it will ruin everything. -- 04:40, October 9, 2010 (UTC) '''Not sure - I know this is a big change and I think some other wikis are also considering moving. I'm leaning towards a wait and see kind of approach. I think waiting to find out how things will look and work after the changes might be worth it. I also think we might want to consider what the RuneScape Wiki is going to do. Many of us also use that wiki and are part of that community so I think whether or not they decide to move might affect what we want to do. That's what i'm thinking for now. Cheers, Tollerach (talk) 20:39, October 9, 2010 (UTC) :That is what I suggest also. Many wikis are doing the "wait and see" approach. I am just worried that if we wait too long our templates, categorizes, etc, will break and it will become a chore to fix them after the move. -- 20:44, October 9, 2010 (UTC) Oppose - I didn't think that this was actually being taken seriously. We're not moving the wiki, that's a horrible idea. 13:26, January 17, 2011 (UTC) :Why, exactly? -- 00:35, January 18, 2011 (UTC) ::First off, a lot of editors here are also editors on the RS wiki, that's how I found this. We'll get less people if we move. Also, Oasis is not that bad, you get used to it. If a simple skin change makes you want to leave Wikia as a whole then you get aggravated too easily. Just a question, why would you want to leave so badly when you just made another appeal to be unblocked on the RS wiki? 22:47, January 18, 2011 (UTC) :::Rsa, the reason I want our wiki to move away from Wikia is not at all because of what is happening on the RS Wiki. If we did move, I would still be on both sites. Mainly, the reason I personally believe we should move is because the treatment we are getting from Wikia; its mediocre. We have seen them not listen to our pleas, reply to our statements, and simply help. I am not saying that the admins are corrupt, more or less their philosophy. Oasis is obviously an eye-opener to the treatment we are getting from our host, and simply shows their lack of care in exchange for "socializing" an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia Britannica and Facebook don't fit together, neither do we with Oasis and Wikia. By the way, I believe we shouldn't be talking about matters on the RS Wiki here. We are still an encyclopedia, and must still edit. -- 23:09, January 18, 2011 (UTC) :::I, and many other potential users, would stop editing if we moved. And while I didn't like Oasis, I understand completely why Wikia couldn't just revert their decision. They decided that Monaco was getting outdated and had to switch. But their users didn't like it. What do you want them to do, just switch back? If they do that they are showing that they're too soft, and that if anyone makes a big stink out of any minor change that they would need to change. There is a reason RS riots never work. 23:23, January 18, 2011 (UTC) ::::I will try to keep out of argument, but why do you believe that Monaco was becoming outdated (in your honest opinion). For, as the last time I used it, it was fanatically better to edit with, place ads on, and to navigate. You cannot use Oasis as a efficient encyclopedia skin at all, even Wikipedia's first skin is more user-friendly. Here, we are not rioting, we are not even asking for change anymore. We now are asking to leave, to leave this host for one which truly cares about the ability to share free knowledge than to use it as a source of greed. As for we being "cut-off" from the RuneScape Wiki, does it matter? Looking at recent changes to this wiki, there is none! We are literally a ghost town, exactly what I predicted over a year ago. We are getting absolutely no editors from the RuneScape Wiki, new editors come from search engines and word-of-mouth, and now the chances of getting new editors is becoming excruciatingly rare. We are completely independent and need absolutely no other wiki to use as a source of editors. Even if we do move, our new link will be added to the RuneScape Classic page of the RS Wiki, and everything will be as usual. It is now simply pointless to stay on Wikia, only to be used as money-makers while there are newly-made hosts on the internet which core philosophy is knowledge, not money! We are literally dying here, and nobody seems to care (especially Wikia)! We have lost almost every single one of our best editors because of declining interest in conjunction with the awful "skin". Rsa, we have a limited chance to actually get Monaco back and be a giver a knowledge again. We must move all our files and start anew, somewhere where we can gather an actual community, plan actual events, and make the largest, most prosperous RSC informational guide in existance. I am sure you understand me, and must take this chance before its too late, which I believe by the edits we are currently getting that my suspicion are right. RS riots may not always win, riots in general might not always succeed, but if we are to basically survive as a encyclopedia of knowledge, the only one of its kind which is still being updated of RuneScape Classic information, we must leave no matter what. -- 06:47, January 19, 2011 (UTC) :::::Are you serious? Because I really can't tell. Of course there's not many editors; it's not like there are millions of classic players like there are for other games. Any wiki about a game with a closed player base will be small. And do you actually think that RS wiki would link to us when we are on a different wiki? Editors come and go all the time, this is nothing new. It happened when we had Monaco and it's happening again now, so what? It will always happen. You can leave and make your own wiki on a different host, I'm not stopping you, but it's a horrible idea and it will be so much smaller than this; also you can't take the files, they're not ours to have. 22:30, January 19, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Rsa, why would I even make this thread in the first place if I was not serious? I mean every little thing I said to this point, and you must know its true. About the players, compared to what we have just a few months ago, the wiki has steadily declined in the addition of new editors. As for the RuneScape link, what is forcing the RSC Wiki not to put our new link? They know the community, and know that we moved, so why wouldn't they update the RSC page? Wikia is not stopping them in any way of doing this, as I currently know. As for the files, we just do a database dump and move! The files are for us to keep, that is what the database dump is for. Then we just email the staff at our new host to upload the database to our new site, with everything in its place (including user and talk pages). -- 14:53, January 20, 2011 (UTC) :::::::The wiki hasn't been declining, it's been steady. We don't have a lot of editors and never have (except for around the open periods), get over it. It will always be like this, and will be worse if we move. I don't think you understand that now, because both the RS and RSC wiki are hosted on Wikia, we are in a way affiliated. Why would they link to a completely different host? Do they also link to Tip.it and RuneHQ? No they don't. Also, if we were to just 'export everything' we would need to attribute it to this 'old' wiki at the end of every article, and that looks unprofessional and stupid. 00:18, January 21, 2011 (UTC) ::::::::Well, from looking at the statistical activity of this wiki, I can make an inference that this wiki is regularly being updated with one edit every two days. That is absolutely ridiculous. As for the attribution, why in the world would we need to do that? When the WoWWiki moved to Curse, they did a statistic dump and never attributed any work, alongside with every other wiki that left Wikia. Its pointless, and even though the encyclopedic information is on Wikia servers, it does not make it their copyrighted text. We have every right to use the information, and to move to another host. -- 04:04, January 21, 2011 (UTC) :::::::::So do something about it, don't blame it on being on Wikia. Try to solve the problem logically instead of looking for crazy answers. I don't know why, but according to law (at least what Wikia states, unless I misread it) we would need to attribute this wiki. I don't know what you're arguing about anymore; nobody is upset about the skin anymore and arguing that we'll get more views on a completely new host with a completely new wiki and therefore completely new editor base is not that smart. 04:32, January 21, 2011 (UTC) :::::::::: I'm not blaming being on Wikia at all, their hosting services and data capacity is actually quite nice. What I am concerned about is the treatment we are getting from Wikia. As for copyright affiliation (again), if what you are saying is true, then every single wiki that moved from Wikia and took their own data with them should have been shut down by now, which is obviously not true. -- 20:23, January 21, 2011 (UTC) :::::::::::Wikia is the top wiki hosting site in the world, at least I'm pretty sure. Why would we get better treatment from some low-rate company who wouldn't give a shit? (And also can't afford to give a shit about some small wiki). And also, illegal activities go on all the time without being shut down because they are bigger things to police; it still doesn't change the fact that it is illegal and shouldn't be done. Until you give me at least one good piece of evidence that: A - We aren't being listened to by Wikia, and B - We would gain significantly more, well, everything, by being on another host I'll keep arguing. 22:46, January 21, 2011 (UTC) ::::::::::::In truth, Wikia's Terms of Use is quite complicated in not directly stating copyrighted materials, so I understand your opinion of believing it might be infringement. Yet, I truly believe that it probably isn't, Wikia is knows well of the move WowWiki did to Curse, becoming Wowpedia. I'm sure if it was infringement Wikia would have done SOMETHING in the last past months about it. -- 01:40, January 22, 2011 (UTC) :::: Comment - I think moving the wiki is too much of a hassle and not worth the time. Also, you mentioned that you want to move because of the "Oasis" skin, right? Well, what if the new wiki system removed the old "Monaco" skin? Will the wiki be moved again? If so, then I think moving just because of that is not worth it. BTW, I agree with what Nex Undique said. If we moved this wiki, then there would most likely be a lot less editors here.Jlun2 06:56, January 22, 2011 (UTC) :I understand where you are coming from, but my proposal for a move is not just because of the skin, but general Wikia treatment. It wouldn't exactly be a hassle, for there isn't that much to do (Inform community, dump, move). Also, I am certain that ShoutWiki is going to keep Monaco, they already licensed a version for their servers. I think the best thing to do now is to have somewhat of a "trial period", which we evaluate all aspects of Oasis/Wikia and the possibilities of moving, then to open a Voting Box/Continued Maple Grove thread on a final vote/consensus. -- 07:30, January 22, 2011 (UTC) ::First of all, the vote box is not formal in any way possible. It is a fun little thing to have polls on, not poll for changes to the wiki, that's what the Maple Grove is for. And you can make your own trial period if you want, I couldn't care less, but you can't use these files/articles without attribution (and I mean this, it clearly states it; very clearly, don't say that it's ambiguous). I really don't know why you think we'll get better treatment on a less-established host; it's usually quite the opposite. And just to add, who predicted that Wikia was going to remove Monaco? Nobody did, so there is no way to know if Shoutwiki will. 15:06, January 22, 2011 (UTC) :::I closed this thread, for we can work on the matter latter. But, what you say is defiantly not true. The Vote Box is to be used in conjunction with the Maple Grove to give a valid, defined answer. A Maple Grove thread would give a consensus decision, while the Voting Box would give a democratic, vote-based and discussion-based decision. Thus, we have all of the wiki either supporting/opposing in both matters. That is the reason why the Voting Box was created, to have a vote-based part of a decision. -- 21:19, January 22, 2011 (UTC) Comment - This discussion has been open for a while now and I have only seen one support for the move. Sirnot, I don't think others in the community support the idea of moving our wiki to a new host. For a move like this to be successful, we would need a majority of our users to be in support of this. This discussion seems to have the same people restating similar ideas. I think it has run its course and we should wrap up this topic soon. If you really want to start a RuneScape Classic wiki on another site, you don't need permission, you can just go ahead and do it. You can give it a shot and see if you can get that one going. Let us know on this Maple Grove topic, what it is and where to find it and that way people can check it out for themselves. Cheers, Tollerach (talk) 17:27, January 22, 2011 (UTC) Closed - Lets see how we do for the next few months or so, if our editor base starts to decline (and Wikian treatment becomes less friendly), we can open up a new Yew Grove/Voting Box on the matter. This one was open a bit too long and has mis-fired ideas. -- 21:19, January 22, 2011 (UTC)